Re: Defaulting to jit=on/off for v11

From: Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)bowt(dot)ie>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Defaulting to jit=on/off for v11
Date: 2018-09-15 00:18:44
Message-ID: CAH2-Wz=OMHjpdtDckVQg3tjqTPaDaRS7OMxEbfhrdJY2WQUg4A@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Fri, Sep 14, 2018 at 3:32 PM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> I'd go with #2, personally. It does seem that the costing needs work,
> but it's not clear to me that we know what to change, so it's kinda
> late to propose #3 for v11.

+1. I also favor option #2.

--
Peter Geoghegan

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Steve Litt 2018-09-15 01:52:40 Re: Code of Conduct plan
Previous Message Michael Paquier 2018-09-14 22:49:39 Re: pgsql: Allow concurrent-safe open() and fopen() in frontend code for Wi